Boulder and the “utility of the future”

Many environmental advocates, myself included, harbor dreams of both national and local energy policy which will propel electric utilities on a trajectory of sustainable change. Boulder, in its municipalization effort, aptly calls this “The Utility of the Future,” and the city deserves credit for spurring the conversation forward in Colorado.

Starry-eyed, we wish for a high level of renewable energy utilized in ways to maximize efficient and effective use, including using forecasting of weather patterns — both sun and wind — such that intermittent resources may be predicted and balanced over wide regions, coordinating with federal agencies to do so.

We also see the Utility of the Future supporting “decoupling,” such that energy efficiency does not carry potential disincentive relating to the utility’s bottom line. We want efforts to educate customers how to change habits and use energy more wisely, shifting some draw on the grid to times of the day when less expensive and cleaner energy is more readily available. We’re interested in solar programs, energy storage, and running our dishwashers when wind energy is apt to be generated.

Further, we dream of regulators who will guide the industry toward ever-higher levels of clean, locally produced energy, enhancing energy security and job creation. And of course, we hope for environmental limits to carbon and other harmful emission to help coax our Utility of the Future along.

Well, dear readers, welcome to “The Future.” Both Xcel Energy, here in Colorado, as well as progressive utilities in other states like California are taking real strides in basically all of these areas, collectively. And recently, a “working group” of local stakeholders and energy experts has formed in an attempt to forge a bold new frontier of public-private partnership concepts between the the city and Xcel … even as Boulder travels tenderly further on their municipalization evaluation.

I hope for the best, but fear that certain activists would likely prefer to rage against the investor-owned utility (IOU) “machine” and proceed on an individualistic path in an attempt to snatch the golden ring of change, the smartest energy-industry followers and organizations I know of quietly spend their time poring through thousands of pages of filings of Public Utility Commission dockets while astutely evaluating how to best press the big boys further down the road.

Why? First, size does matter. The IOUs can simply create more change, faster.

Second, they are often stabler and better-capitalized, giving them deeper pockets when inspired to reach into them. When a municipal utility invests in an experimental project, they may be putting an awful lot of their borrowing power on the line. And what if they fail? It can be difficult or impossible to get out from under their debt.

Third, the larger IOU entities carry tremendous advantage in their ability to utilize economies of scale. Further, and not to be underestimated, IOU employees often truly are cutting-edge experts. For example, the federal government looks to the large utilites for guidance in actualizing, for example, cybersecurity measures, as they have tapped an Xcel executive for, recently.

And if regional energy markets open up further, who will best be able to trade valuable resources to nearby states who may be struggling to meet a Renewable Portfolio Standard?

And here’s something we may rarely think of: Larger entities may even be incentivized by seeing each other advance. Being a national leader has some real advantages. Recently, California’s massive PG&E has proposed, along with other parties, an innovative renewable energy product which would enable customers to enroll in a 100% “green” option utilizing in-state resources, and potentially local. There are even hints of community energy features, down the road.

Many activists in Boulder would like to take credit for moving Xcel Energy forward. But at this point in time, some of the most compelling drivers of change are the implementation of profound regulation at the federal level, such as limitation on CO2 emissions, haze, mercury and other air toxics. The looming prospect of even tighter regulation of carbon is a real game-changer.

And this is coincidentally when we see the IOUs kick into gear, like we are seeing now. In the utility landscape of the future, the activist who refuses to be nimble and open-minded may be left toiling in the fields beside the superhighway that the real movers-and-shakers — the progressive utilities — are speeding forward on.

Let’s hope they don’t flip each other “the bird” as they pass each other, but instead find a path to work together.

Karey Christ-Janer is a renewable energy and utility reform advocate in Berthoud and Sonoma, Calif.

Vincent Carroll is The Denver Post's editorial page editor. He has been writing commentary on politics and public policy in Colorado since 1982 and was originally with the Rocky Mountain News, where he was also editor of the editorial pages until that newspaper gave up the ghost in 2009.

Guidelines: The Post welcomes letters up to 150 words on topics of general interest. Letters must include full name, home address, day and evening phone numbers, and may be edited for length, grammar and accuracy.

To reach the Denver Post editorial page by phone: 303-954-1331

Posts by Category

Posts by Category

Idea Log Archives

Idea Log Archives

About The Idea Log

The idea log The Denver Post editorial board shares commentary and opinion on issues of interest to Coloradans.